-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/68232/#review208136
-----------------------------------------------------------



PASS: Mesos patch 68232 was successfully built and tested.

Reviews applied: `['68230', '68231', '68232']`

All the build artifacts available at: 
http://dcos-win.westus.cloudapp.azure.com/artifacts/mesos-reviewbot-testing/2265/mesos-review-68232

- Mesos Reviewbot Windows


On Aug. 30, 2018, 3:46 p.m., Andrei Budnik wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/68232/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated Aug. 30, 2018, 3:46 p.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for mesos, Alexander Rukletsov, Benjamin Mahler, Gilbert Song, 
> and Qian Zhang.
> 
> 
> Bugs: MESOS-9131
>     https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-9131
> 
> 
> Repository: mesos
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> Previously, when a corresponding nested container terminated, while the
> user was attached to the container's stdin via `ATTACH_CONTAINER_INPUT`
> IOSwitchboard didn't terminate immediately. IOSwitchboard was waiting
> for EOF message from the input HTTP connection. Since the IOSwitchboard
> was stuck, the corresponding nested container was also stuck in
> `DESTROYING` state.
> 
> This patch fixes the aforementioned issue by sending 200 `OK` response
> for `ATTACH_CONTAINER_INPUT` call in the case when io redirect is
> finished while reading from the HTTP input connection is not.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   src/slave/containerizer/mesos/io/switchboard.cpp 
> 52b0e521ed1c651c90b3a3df7c4df576288bf400 
> 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/68232/diff/5/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> 1. internal CI
> 2. sudo make check (Fedora 25)
> 
> This test fixes `LaunchNestedContainerSessionKillTask` test, which can be 
> found in the first patch of this patch chain.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Andrei Budnik
> 
>

Reply via email to